the Confederacy yes or no

many times I will get into a discussion with someone about the Confederacy I have always looked at him as a separate country they had a president and Congress and a Constitution . So here is the question why do people say they were good Americans they may have been good men but did they want to be part of the United States.

many times I will get into a discussion with someone about the Confederacy I have always looked at him as a separate country they had a president and Congress and a Constitution . So here is the question why do people say they were good Americans they may have been good men but did they want to be part of the United States.

Click to expand...

Because people have an issue with term 'America' being applied to the entire landmass of the Western Hemisphere. Remember, what does the 'A' stand for in the CSA again?

I can agree to a point. What is "South ......." called? I honestly have no idea what it was in 1861, but now Maine to Argentina/Chili is Something "America". Continent wise anyway.
It's a very high level explanation that many felt that they had no right to secede. And that argument will probably go on as long as people study the war. My opinion anyway.

So here is the question: Why do people say they were good Americans? They may have been good men, but did they want to be part of the United States.

Click to expand...

Use of the term "Americans" in this way is an attempt to square the circle -- it's making a distinction between "America" and "United States" that doesn't really exist elsewhere in common usage, then or now. It's a linguistic gimmick to obscure the fact that Confederates were taking up arms against their own national government, as if "Americans" were somehow a different group than U.S. citizens.

many times I will get into a discussion with someone about the Confederacy I have always looked at him as a separate country they had a president and Congress and a Constitution . So here is the question why do people say they were good Americans they may have been good men but did they want to be part of the United States.

Click to expand...

Just part of the growing pains of a young nation. unfortunate but it is what it is. There were many reasons to include human bondage (property rights) to the people right of the state to govern itself and laws. Now rank and file didn't own slaves and may not have been for slavery but the right of the people to determine its law. Unless someone knows different the leaders of the south were or were associated with human bondage making profit from it. They took a gamble and lost, with the loss of a 1/2 million North Americans. Outside influences from foreign powers added to the cause with expectation of financial gain, opportunity to regain control of the land mass and/or other spoils of war. Without the sponsorship of foreign governments I doubt there would have been a war of such magnitude.

The Confederacy shared a common culture, language and history with the United States. It looked to the same heroes and ideals to shape its sense of purpose. That's why they thought about themselves as American. If anything, I think it saw itself as the keeper of that tradition and culture when it was formed. The Confederacy was, at the core, a conservative revolution. Some authors feel that this lack of distinction contributed to the eventual failure of the Confederacy.
After the war, many high and low profile Confederates worked for unity, pulling the nation back together again. That's why we still continue to call them Americans.

From the point of view of the United States government at the time the Confederates were never anything except Americans in a state of rebellion. In order to be something other than American, the Confederacy would have to be recognized as a legitimate foreign power.

Use of the term "Americans" in this way is an attempt to square the circle -- it's making a distinction between "America" and "United States" that doesn't really exist elsewhere in common usage, then or now. It's a linguistic gimmick to obscure the fact that Confederates were taking up arms against their own national government, as if "Americans" were somehow a different group than U.S. citizens.

I'm not buying it.

Click to expand...

thank you Andy I realize by putting America down I should have said United States. You at least answered the question.

I have a better idea rather than answering the question let's pick a part the word American. It is much easier to challenge my use of words then answer a question you might find uncomfortable. I did say America what I should have said was the United States of American . And really if all you can do is correct someone's spelling may be you should be on another site like the literature channel. Where you can come and correct all the poor pronunciations and spelling.

I have a better idea rather than answering the question let's pick a part the word American. It is much easier to challenge my use of words then answer a question you might find uncomfortable. I did say America what I should have said was the United States of American . And really if all you can do is correct someone's spelling may be you should be on another site like the literature channel. Where you can come and correct all the poor pronunciations and spelling.

Click to expand...

They did want to be part of the United States. They simply didn't want to be a part of the United States without the constitution as it was written. They said it best...

“I love the Union and the Constitution, but I would rather leave the Union with the Constitution than remain in the Union without it.”
Confederate President Jefferson Davis

“If they (the North) prevail, the whole character of the Government will be changed, and instead of a federal republic, the common agent of sovereign and independent States, we shall have a central despotism, with the notion of States forever abolished, deriving its powers from the will, and shaping its policy according to the wishes, of a numerical majority of the people; we shall have, in other words, a supreme, irresponsible democracy. The Government does not now recognize itself as an ordinance of God, and when all the checks and balances of the Constitution are gone, we may easily figure to ourselves the career and the destiny of this godless monster of democratic absolutism. The progress of regulated liberty on this continent will be arrested, anarchy will soon succeed, and the end will be a military despotism, which preserves order by the sacrifice of the last vestige of liberty.

They are now fighting the battle of despotism. They have put their Constitution under their feet; they have annulled its most sacred provisions; The future fortunes of our children, and of this continent, would then be determined by a tyranny which has no parallel in history.”
Dr. James Henly Thornwell of South Carolina, in Our Danger and our Duty, 1862

“I loved the old government in 1861. I loved the old Constitution yet. I think it is the best government in the world, if administered as it was before the war. I do not hate it; I am opposing now only the radical revolutionists who are trying to destroy it. I believe that party to be composed, as I know it is in Tennessee, of the worst men on Gods earth – men who would not hesitate at no crime, and who have only one object in view – to enrich themselves.”
Nathan Bedford Forrest, in an interview shortly after the war

They did want to be part of the United States. They simply didn't want to be a part of the United States without the constitution as it was written. They said it best...

“I love the Union and the Constitution, but I would rather leave the Union with the Constitution than remain in the Union without it.”
Confederate President Jefferson Davis

“If they (the North) prevail, the whole character of the Government will be changed, and instead of a federal republic, the common agent of sovereign and independent States, we shall have a central despotism, with the notion of States forever abolished, deriving its powers from the will, and shaping its policy according to the wishes, of a numerical majority of the people; we shall have, in other words, a supreme, irresponsible democracy. The Government does not now recognize itself as an ordinance of God, and when all the checks and balances of the Constitution are gone, we may easily figure to ourselves the career and the destiny of this godless monster of democratic absolutism. The progress of regulated liberty on this continent will be arrested, anarchy will soon succeed, and the end will be a military despotism, which preserves order by the sacrifice of the last vestige of liberty.

They are now fighting the battle of despotism. They have put their Constitution under their feet; they have annulled its most sacred provisions; The future fortunes of our children, and of this continent, would then be determined by a tyranny which has no parallel in history.”
Dr. James Henly Thornwell of South Carolina, in Our Danger and our Duty, 1862

“I loved the old government in 1861. I loved the old Constitution yet. I think it is the best government in the world, if administered as it was before the war. I do not hate it; I am opposing now only the radical revolutionists who are trying to destroy it. I believe that party to be composed, as I know it is in Tennessee, of the worst men on Gods earth – men who would not hesitate at no crime, and who have only one object in view – to enrich themselves.”
Nathan Bedford Forrest, in an interview shortly after the war

Click to expand...

Looks like Dr. James Henly Thornwell of South Carolina got it wrong from the git-go. The states were NOT "sovereign and independent" so sayeth the Constitution's Section 10, Article I, and Article VI, which they ratified.

many times I will get into a discussion with someone about the Confederacy I have always looked at him as a separate country they had a president and Congress and a Constitution . So here is the question why do people say they were good Americans they may have been good men but did they want to be part of the United States.

Click to expand...

I hate it when some Southerners say things like that. Drop the “good” and it sounds too much like something Abraham Lincoln wold have said.

They did want to be part of the United States. They simply didn't want to be a part of the United States without the constitution as it was written. They said it best...

“I love the Union and the Constitution, but I would rather leave the Union with the Constitution than remain in the Union without it.”
Confederate President Jefferson Davis

“If they (the North) prevail, the whole character of the Government will be changed, and instead of a federal republic, the common agent of sovereign and independent States, we shall have a central despotism, with the notion of States forever abolished, deriving its powers from the will, and shaping its policy according to the wishes, of a numerical majority of the people; we shall have, in other words, a supreme, irresponsible democracy. The Government does not now recognize itself as an ordinance of God, and when all the checks and balances of the Constitution are gone, we may easily figure to ourselves the career and the destiny of this godless monster of democratic absolutism. The progress of regulated liberty on this continent will be arrested, anarchy will soon succeed, and the end will be a military despotism, which preserves order by the sacrifice of the last vestige of liberty.

They are now fighting the battle of despotism. They have put their Constitution under their feet; they have annulled its most sacred provisions; The future fortunes of our children, and of this continent, would then be determined by a tyranny which has no parallel in history.”
Dr. James Henly Thornwell of South Carolina, in Our Danger and our Duty, 1862

“I loved the old government in 1861. I loved the old Constitution yet. I think it is the best government in the world, if administered as it was before the war. I do not hate it; I am opposing now only the radical revolutionists who are trying to destroy it. I believe that party to be composed, as I know it is in Tennessee, of the worst men on Gods earth – men who would not hesitate at no crime, and who have only one object in view – to enrich themselves.”
Nathan Bedford Forrest, in an interview shortly after the war

Click to expand...

What the above writers really hated is that Lincoln won the election of 1861 fair and square. None of them mention that Lincoln was kept off the ballot in most Southern states. None if them mention that anti secessionist voters were physically threatened. Yes I have a sourced thread in that.
None of them mention that Lincoln promised not to take away their slaves or even during the early part of the war Southern slave owners were still allowed to track their escaped slaves and retrieve them from behind Union lines.
Leftyhunter

Looks like Dr. James Henly Thornwell of South Carolina got it wrong from the git-go. The states were NOT "sovereign and independent" so sayeth the Constitution's Section 10, Article I, and Article VI, which they ratified.

Click to expand...

Only on certain matters.

But that's irrelevant. Once the northern states and federal government were in breach of contract in regards to the constitution and refused to desist, the other party has no duty to fulfill it's obligations under said contract.